ESTRELITA DAVIS, APPELLANT,
v.
BAT MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION, INC., ETC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the trial court's directed verdict for Bat Management Foundation in a declaratory judgment action where Davis sought to establish her aunt's competence to execute a durable power of attorney, holding that conflicting evidence on competence precluded summary judgment and that Davis's disqualification motion was legally insufficient.
Summary judgment was properly denied because conflicting evidence existed on the issue of the aunt's competence, and the disqualification motion was properly denied because it failed to specifically describe any prejudice or bias by the trial court.
[1] A motion to disqualify a judge must specifically describe prejudice or bias and cannot be based solely on the judge's adverse rulings on motions.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEstrelita Davis sought a declaration that her aunt, Lillian Johnson, was competent when she executed a Durable Power of Attorney and Designation of He…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Competency cases and more on FLexlaw
ANTOON, Judge.
Estrelita Davis appeals the final order entered by the trial court directing a verdict in favor of Bat Management Foundation, Inc., in this declaratory judgment action. Ms. Davis sought a declaration that her aunt, Lillian Johnson, was competent at the time she executed a Durable Power of Attorney and a Designation of Health Care Surrogate in favor of Ms. Davis. However, the trial' court entered judgment against her. We affirm.
Ms. Davis first contends that the trial court erred in denying her motion for summary judgment. Review of the record reveals that the court properly concluded that summary judgment could not be entered because the record contained conflicting evidence on the issue of Ms. Johnson’s competence. See Lane v. Talloni, 626 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Ms. Davis also argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion to disqualify as being legally insufficient. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.160(f). This ruling was also correct because Ms. Davis’ motion failed to specifically describe any prejudice or bias on the part of the trial court, and instead, merely cited to the fact that the trial court had denied Ms. Davis’ motion for summary judgment. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.160(d)(1). See also Solana v. Solana, 706 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).
AFFIRMED.
W. SHARP and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Enter. Leasing Co. v. Josiah Nathaniel Douglas Jones, 750 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…ias or prejudice, say the respondents, must be actual rather than presumptive. See, e.g., Jackson v. State, 599 So. 2d 103, 107 (Fla.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1004, 113 S.Ct. 612, 121 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992); Davis v. Bat Management Foundation, Inc., 723 So. 2d 349, 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Levine v. State, 650 So. 2d 666, 667 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). In the instant case Enterprise does not allege any specific action or statements by the trial judge at all. Instead, Enterprise advocates that a trial court’s mere k…
Authorities Cited
- Curtiss W. Carlin v. State, 626 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Almeida v. State, 706 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)